No Greater Joy Ministries » The Rod

Spank and Save a Child

Michael Pearl — Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:00:31 +0000

You may have noticed No Greater Joy and Michael Pearl receiving a lot of negative press lately over advocating corporal discipline as part of a comprehensive child training program. Television reporters came out to the office. We were in newspapers from coast to coast. Even CBS, after running an uninformed criticism of us, offered to fly us to New York to answer their unfounded charges on The Morning Show. I was eager to answer, and readily agreed. Those of you on our email list were immediately informed and many of you prayed for the will of God to be done. CBS called for a pre-interview and then canceled the afternoon before the show. I think they discovered in the pre-interview that I was not the Bible-thumping caricature they had hoped. One news outlet reviewed our website and gave a very positive review, saying there was nothing in our material that would ever lead to child abuse. On the bright side, our sales skyrocketed this month. Even before this recent publicity, one out of every 75 Americans have been introduced to our ministry. It’s a battle I would not have fought so boldly twenty years ago when we still had small children at home. The potential for institutional retribution is too great—almost a certainty. But I am now too old to be intimidated, and the battle is much bigger than the spanking flap. They’re not just coming after me, but all parents who believe parenting is a God-given responsibility. The anti-spanking campaign is a front for an anti-family agenda, a progressive socialist movement to reengineer society with government the only mentor of children. A few well- placed individuals in government, media, and the educational system religiously promote a new world order where the collective state replaces God and the Constitution. They must control the minds of the citizenry if they are to institute their totalitarian policies; and they are well aware from history that mind control must begin with the youth—thus the public school system. But homeschool parents and Christian parents protect their children from corrupt worldviews. The socialists know that the last remaining bulwark against brainwashing children is parental headship—thus their hostility toward the family. As long as parents are free to pass on their culture and faith, totalitarian government is impossible. Their earlier promotion of organic evolution was an effective wedge against Biblical faith and the dignity of man, but it has taken them as far as it can, for it is losing credibility in the face of genetic discoveries and contrary evidence. The leading edge of the attack upon parental authority is now the anti-spanking movement. They will use any means to police the home and mandate parental conduct, but they know that to receive public support their home incursion must be seen as a necessary act of compassion. They paint themselves as concerned now for the children they would have aborted a few years earlier. Public schools are the propaganda wing of the socialist agenda. They rewrite history books and social studies, purging the texts of the part fundamental Christianity played in forming our constitutional republic. They are teaching America’s children to be ashamed of our past, to despise free enterprise and individualism, knowing that when the kids grow up they will be willing to adopt the more “moral” socialists’ agenda that puts the powers of God into the hands of the state. But along came homeschooling, growing larger every year, and with it a general awakening to the fact that the subtle changes occurring around us are not just encroaching liberalism, not just ideological evolution, but an orchestrated purge of truth and human dignity with totalitarianism as its end. In the progressive vision individuals are of no importance beyond their contribution to the perpetuation and health of the State. One judge presiding over a custody case said, “The children of homeschool families will not fit into the new world order.” He was dead right. The first countries to ban spanking were the most ardent communists and fascists. Leading the way were China, Russia, and North Korea, followed by some of the socialist countries of Europe. My critics don’t bother to read our material. They get their quotes—supposedly my statements—from web sites that got their quotes from other web sites that along the way sliced and diced my writings, changing words like “spank” to “beat” to create a caricature that any clear thinking person would find offensive. They build a straw man and then expect us to defend it. I am not whining. It goes with the territory. But why all the lies and hostility?

Why All the Lies?

There are many ordinary people in our country that do not identify themselves with the progressive/socialist faction, yet unknowingly are spokesmen for some of its important tenets. You see them duped into supporting the global warming crowd, the radical environmentalists, animal rights activists, the gay agenda, and any number of “social justice” movements. They may join the crusade against spanking, “hate speech”, cult indoctrination or any number of social issues that are none of their business. How do otherwise ordinary people get caught up supporting some part of a movement to re-engineer society? They have big compassionate hearts, and the social engineers have painted each of these issues as a moral struggle. Who doesn’t want social justice (in the classical sense,) and to “save the planet,” and save the children from cruelty? Many people need a crusade, and the media, especially television, offer them causes that make them feel they are part of the solution.

The Fringe

The uninformed who listens to the media would think that spanking is something done by the fringe, an angry and abusive minority. The media uses inflammatory rhetoric like “beat” instead of “spank” or “corporal punishment” instead of “physical discipline,” obscuring a line that is extremely clear to responsible parents. I read an anti-spanking article by a psychologist that said she did not believe in spanking, but she went on to confess that on occasion she got so angry with her children that she did scream at them. She told of receiving a ten minute lecture in a grocery store from another shopper rebuking her for angry, abusive language toward her children. She also confessed that on occasion her anger had caused her to slap her children in the face. She was ashamed of her behavior and was making a candid confession, but she went on to use her experience as an example of why parents should not adopt a policy of “hitting their children.” The occasional slips were bad enough; don’t institutionalize the practice, she said. My advice to this professionally trained mother is, “Don’t hit your children; don’t even think about spanking; you need to receive counsel from a hillbilly mother with a sixth grade education before you have any more children; you are out of control.” But her confession points to the reason a small minority associate all spanking with hitting and violence, and why they are categorically against it to the point of pushing for laws criminalizing parents who spank their kids. Indeed, knowing their own weakness and anger, they transfer that violent nature to all parents. When you add to the equation the movie and media characterization of stern, legalistic parents “beating the fear of God” into their kids, they have reason to stand against all spanking. The opponents of corporal discipline have never experienced the kind of peace and stability that allows a parent to spank in love for the good of the child. They know that when they strike their children, it is definitely abusive, and they project that motive to everyone. They see government as the savior of all children, standing between cruel parents and their helpless children. They would have us believe that untrained parents are incapable of knowing what is best for their children, while a few hours of liberal arts training and personal therapy transforms on-duty government employees into wise and loving mentors.

Hitting Children

No one advocates “hitting children,” but our angry opponents can’t seem to read. We say “switch;” they quote us saying “tree branch.” We say “spank;” they quote us as saying “beat.” They deliberately do not distinguish between the loving, compassionate, measured spankings we advocate and the out of control violence of parents reacting in anger and aggression toward helpless children. Parents who strike out in anger are most often anti-spanking proponents who reach the end of their tolerance curve. Not having spanking as part of their toolkit, they end up frustrated with their rebellious children and eventually explode in retribution. In contrast, parents who wisely employ spanking with their training soon have such happy and compliant kids that no one is ever provoked to anger. History will show that parents have not abandoned physical discipline because it proved to be ineffective, but because many parents have become ashamed of the way they apply it. That is why No Greater Joy teaches parents to patiently “train up a child in the way he should go.”

Opponents

Dr. Aletha Solter, founder of the Aware Parenting Institute, argues that corporal punishment teaches violence to children otherwise born innocent: “What happens in each home is at the root of world peace. If we’re going to be hitting children, they’re going to go around wanting to hit and hurt other people. If we raise them with gentle discipline, then we’re creating a gentle world.” Well, ten percent of the children never get hit. Are they examples of world peace and emotional stability? Opponents make the false assertion that children who are “hit” by their parents grow up to be violent, citing studies that support their claim. But if you look at the details of their studies, you will note that they gather their data from interviews with violent criminals or psychiatric patients. “You murdered six women; were you spanked when you were a child?” Since 90% of all U.S. parents spank or “hit” their kids, what do you think the results are going to show? That’s right; nine out of ten violent criminals were spanked when they were children. I have never seen a study that asked a group of well-adjusted professionals if they were physically disciplined as children and what part they thought it played in their success. What would our critics conclude by the fact that 90% of the successful, nonviolent professionals were spanked by their parents?

Research Supports Spanking

Many pediatricians believe that responsible spanking outperforms faddish disciplinary approaches. Marjorie Gunnoe, a developmental psychologist at Calvin College, did a study of 2,600 people, about a quarter of whom had never been physically chastised. She concluded that young children spanked by their parents may grow up to be happier and more successful than those who have never been spanked. According to the research, children spanked up to the age of 6 were likely as teenagers to perform better at school and were more likely to carry out volunteer work and to want to go to college than their peers who had never been physically disciplined. Child psychologists Diana Baumrind and Elizabeth Owens conducted a study. Owens is a research scientist at the Institute of Human Development at the University of California at Berkeley. As a mother of a three- and a five-year-old, Owens says, “As a parent I am morally opposed to spanking.” But as a scientist, she says, “A blanket injunction against spanking is not warranted by the data. If you look at the causally relevant evidence, it’s not scientifically defensible to say that spanking is always a horrible thing. I don’t think mild, occasional spankings in an otherwise supportive, loving family will do any long-term harm.”

Media Campaign

The media campaign against spanking is designed to win the perception war. If they can make parents think that they are out of the mainstream, part of an unpopular minority, they will come to doubt their natural parental instincts and shrink from their responsibilities to continue the tradition of nurturing the young through tested means, of which spanking is a part. The progressives will then be free, without dissent, to pass unconstitutional legislation making any form of physical discipline a crime punishable by imprisonment and loss of their children to the state.

Common Law Right

A Minnesota trial court has ruled that “laws against school paddling do not supersede the common-law right to spank a child.” The Supreme Court in Ingraham v. Wright, 1977, held that school corporal punishment of students does not violate the federal Constitution—does not amount to cruel and unusual punishment. The constitution of the United States recognizes the existence of common law rights and offers protection in the exercise thereof. These rights are said to be unalienable. That is, these rights, springing from God, being part of our nature, are inherent in our humanity and cannot be transferred to government, nor can government assume those powers that belong to the individual alone. It is no wonder that we should find it addressed in Holy Scripture, for before it was a Biblical precept it is found to be a natural right embedded in our human natures. A natural right is a moral duty. To breach a natural right against one’s neighbor is an act of violence and thuggery. For a government to breach that right in promotion of its own ends is tyranny. It is the duty of every man to promote the human rights of all men. Society was more stable and more moral before government intruded into our common law rights. When I was in school in the fifties violence against teachers was unheard of. Kids always obeyed the teachers or were paddled with the oak “board of education.” I cannot remember a moment when things got out of control in school. There were no drugs, no alcohol, no cursing, and no talking back to teachers.

Still Legal

Note that 22 states still practice “corporal punishment” in public schools. The anti-spanking campaign Center for Effective Discipline, extrapolating from sample statistics collected by federal authorities, estimates that the number of students spanked or paddled in 2006 in U.S. public schools was about 223,000. Contrary to the perception produced by the media, you do have a right to spank your children in all 50 states. In Tennessee, Child Protection Services says it is not abuse unless marks remain on the child 24 hours after the fact. You can read the laws for your state online. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services defines physical child abuse as “any non-accidental physical injury to the child, and can include striking, kicking, burning, or biting the child, or any action that results in a physical impairment of the child.” In my opinion, that is an acceptable legal definition of child abuse that does not infringe upon parental rights, but my personal definition of abuse would be broader, including mental, verbal, and physical abuse where the spanking is not severe but is not done in the proper spirit of love and good will. Yet I recognize that not all abuse rises to the level of requiring government intervention. When children are in genuine danger, under proper guidelines the government should step in and remedy the situation.

Mainstream

Opponents like to characterize those of us who advocate corporal chastisement as a minority, as fringe, less intelligent, behind the times, religious nuts. The opposite is true. Down through the ages in every culture, wise and compassionate men have promoted and practiced corporal training of their young. The practice is mainstream, traditional, grassroots, natural, and effective. Corporal discipline is a natural part of parental nurturing, of caring parents seeking the best for their children. Hence, it is not surprising to find it promoted by God himself, the creator of all children (Proverbs 13:24; 19:18; 22:15; 29:15, 17). But God also recognizes that parents can abuse their authority. Jesus warned, “But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea” (Matthew 18:6). He continued by advising the offender of little children, “if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee.” Many polls have shown that 65 to 75 percent of all parents endorse the use of physical discipline. Even the progressive ABC News conducted a poll that concluded that 65 percent of parents approve of physical discipline while 31 percent disapprove. Additional studies reveal that of those who say they disapprove, two-thirds of them confess to hitting their children in anger. Only about ten percent of parents profess to not believe in physical discipline and to not have practiced it. So who is in the mainstream? The traditional parents who believe in and practice corporal discipline are the vast majority and have the support of tradition and history. We likewise have the support of the Constitution and the findings of the courts. We also have the blessings of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the public schools who still practice it. Most of all, we have the support of God. The anti-spankers are the small minority who don’t trust their ability to act in a restrained and productive manner and do not believe you can either. Our children rise up and call us blessed; I will let their children tell us what they think of their parents.

The Exception Proves the Rule

Our opponents sit in front of their TV sets or computer screens waiting for months or years until some out of control parent beats his child to death in the name of corporal punishment. They then call for a ban on all spanking. They reason that if one parent can misuse the human right to physically train their children then all parents should be denied the traditional right. It is our contention that all authority is abused at some time or another by a minority, but that does not negate the need for that authority. Every day several people overdose on prescription drugs and die. Many children die from just aspirin alone. The label warns against abusing the drug, but some people are not motivated by reason, and they or their children die. Should all aspirin be banned because it is sometimes misused? Obviously not. Out of the five million people who are familiar with our teaching, our opponents may have finally found one family that severely abused their children. The anti-spanking lobbyists come alive like fire ants in a disturbed anthill. “It’s your teaching that led to this tragedy,” they scream. A tragedy is always tragic and sad, but why must someone else be to blame? Are men not independently capable of error or evil? If a man leaves an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting and gets drunk, do you blame the twelve step program? If a man under psychiatric care commits a heinous crime, do we charge the psychiatrist? If a teen kills himself in an auto accident after taking drivers ed at school, do we stop the program? When an angry, abusive parent recognizes his need to reform and seeks help through our material, but lapses back into his predisposed habits, injuring his children yet again, is our material that teaches caution and moderation to blame? The bias and underlying agenda of the anti-spanking minority is obvious.

Marching On

We will not be deterred from our sensible course by social engineers who want to replace parents with a failed philosophy. We will go on doing what our parents and grandparents and great-grandparents have done for many generations: we will train our children with all the means we deem best to bring them up to be responsible, emotionally stable, productive individuals. Get used to it. We are here to stay. By the way, our happy children are multiplying at four times the national average. Your unruly and undisciplined children will soon need a job. Don’t worry; our properly spanked, highly motivated, well-educated kids will be hiring.

The post Spank and Save a Child appeared first on No Greater Joy Ministries.

Child Training Marathon Revisited and Updated

Michael Pearl — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:00:38 +0000

It was a busy, trying time for them, preparing meals and hauling us around from town to town, with meetings every night and sometimes all day. They urged us to be diligent in observing their every act and response, sharing any insights that might be helpful in improving their child training techniques. If an occasion arose and we didn’t speak out, they brought it to our attention and asked how and what should be done. This family meant business. When we arrived, we assumed they must be having problems with their teenagers, since parents usually don’t panic until they have a teenager making their lives miserable, but that was not the case. By today’s Christian standards, they had a well ordered-home. Their oldest child, a boy of about seventeen, was a real joy to his parents. But as the children got younger, there was a definite deterioration in their attitude and self-control. I am not sure why this is sometimes the case. Often parents seem to tire of the rigors of teaching and discipline and begin to slack off with their younger ones. Or perhaps when the older children are turning out well, parents ease up on their vigilance, taking their success for granted. Family values often change as economic success interrupts family unity. And of course, when a marriage slowly erodes, the younger children will not be rooted in the same loving, secure environment as were the first ones. This family had applied the teaching of our book To Train Up a Child and seen great improvement. But their six-year-old boy occasionally went into a rage when things didn’t go his way. We observed that he was a very good psychologist. When angry, he would express his hurt feelings in a way that caused his parents to feel guilty, evoking just enough doubt and insecurity in them to blunt their decisiveness and lessen their application of discipline. Being cautious of his “touchy” emotional state, they resorted to pleading and reason, explaining how “they really did love him” and how he was “not a bad person.” I watched the boy commit an offense, throw a fit when corrected, and then end up lecturing his parents on how mistreated he was. “You don’t love me like the others. You think I am dumb. Why am I always the one to blame?” It all settled down with the parents apologizing and the kid stomping off to brood until the parents expressed proper contrition. Amazing! Brilliant—in a wicked sort of way. Now, I am well aware of the many things parents can do to cause children insecurity and hurt. But I will save that for another day. Here was a selfish, manipulative brat who had found his parents’ weakness and capitalized on it. Mom and Dad occasionally expressed just enough anger and resentment to cause them to doubt themselves. Sensing their lack of confidence, the boy found ways to further deepen their guilt. He knew just what to say to cause them pain. Did he have a legitimate basis for accusing his parents of being unworthy to be his head? In some cases, as is probably true with nearly all parents, yes. He capitalized on their sense of moral inadequacy. Granted, if they had maintained clear consciences his manipulations would have fallen flat. It was their humble sensitivity to their own failures that caused them to relinquish the moral authority of the family to this six-year-old tyrant. It reminds us of how the coming of the law increases sin (Rom. 7). Now, the obvious solution is to tell parents to instantly become wise and discerning. If all parents were ideal Christians with no shortcomings, no hang-ups, nothing to cause guilt, then they would always have the moral strength to withstand manipulation. Christian maturity is normal, but the fact is that in most cases it doesn’t come until the children are grown. Should parents wait until they are sufficiently mature and worthy before assuming command? If so, it may then be too late for the children. “So, if I am not the perfect parent am I going to abdicate the throne to my imperfect child?” If your child is smart enough to touch your weak spots and make you feel guilt, is he therefore more righteous, more wise? Remember, he is using his parents’ weaknesses to silence them and eliminate their interference so he can act in selfish and unruly ways. I will remind you that parenthood is not an appointed office; it is not by the consent of the child. Parents hold an office (parenthood) that carries with it certain obligations and authority, apart from their worthiness. For the sake of your children, you must act now. You must rise above feelings of inferiority or unworthiness. By “rise above,” I mean you must act for the child’s benefit, whether you feel up to the task or not. In our observation of this family, we detected that the mother was a very “sensitive” person. She was the first to feel the child’s “emotional pain.” She shied away from confrontation until provoked by frustration and anger. She never spoke with authority or conviction—tired frustration, yes, but not with dignity and authority. She ASKED the children to comply. She “patiently” coaxed and compassionately pleaded with them. When they ignored her “suggestions”, she would then become exasperated and reach an impasse where she felt overwhelmed and defeated. This mother was physically and emotionally abused as a child. Overcompensating, she was always fearful of not being sensitive and patient enough with her own children. She didn’t trust herself. She didn’t trust her husband—though she would say she did. She was fearful of him being like her father. Her six-year-old boy didn’t have any sense of being abused, and he was not broken in spirit as he often portrayed. But he was a smart little psychologist and knew just how to hurt his mother and short-circuit her interference with his indulgence. He was emotionally stronger than she was. What of the father? As is true of most families trapped in today’s industrialized lifestyle, he was away from home most of every day. Feeling out of touch, in most cases he naturally deferred to his wife’s judgment. He did have more control over the children, but the pattern was set and habits formed during the two-thirds of the day when the kids were under her tutelage. He, too, stood back with insecurity when he saw the “deep hurt” of his son. He felt guilty for not being there more of the time, for dumping the load on his wife. The parents had good hearts. They were just blinded by their own fear and sense of helplessness. One day we were sitting in the living room discussing an event that had just occurred when their over-sized dog attempted to interrupt. The father, hardly looking at the dog, commanded him to go downstairs. He didn’t raise his voice, and there was no anger. He spoke with firm authority, expecting the dog to obey without further word or attention. The dog took off downstairs like he had just heard from God. I suddenly realized that in this quiet-spoken home, I had never heard either parent speak with confident authority. What solution did we offer this couple? We told the mother particularly, “Get tough; you are thinking more of your own feelings than you are the needs of your children. Don’t let your past hurts come into the present to continue hurting your children. You are allowing your abusive father to abuse your children through your continuing reactions.” Right in the middle of several emotional confrontations with Knuckle Head, we guided the parents through responses to their children. “Quit asking,” we would say, “Tell him what to do, and put a little toughness in your voice.” Then we would tell her, “Don’t tell him again; respect your own word; get your switch and apply it right where he stubbornly sits; ignore his self-pity. Don’t assure him of your love; assure him of your authority. You are in the right; put your shoulders back and act like a commanding officer whose word is final. Do not negotiate or explain. Mother, take the whine out of your voice, and put some steel in your posture. Stay calm, but unmoving.” They tried it out like someone trying on uncomfortable clothes. The kid was amazed to discover that no one cared for his manipulating pity shows. One word from a parent was the last word—no repeat, no appeal, and no regret. It took three days, but when the child realized he had no recourse, he obeyed the first time and kept his mouth shut. By the end of the week, he was expressing more love and appreciation for his mother than ever before. He began to admire her rather than see her as a weakling he could control. It was a joy to see and share in their victory. Their youngest boy, age two or three, had a tough hide that at times absolutely resisted all control. He would whine, and whine, and cry, and plead, and demand. He was a tough nut to break, but it was a simple procedure that didn’t hurt anyone but the parents. Again, it was their lack of resolute authority that cultivated whining in this two-year-old. Since the parents were seldom decisive, the child had learned that begging and pleading often caused them to capitulate to his will. When they said “no,” he knew it was just the starting point in negotiations. After reading our book, on several occasions the parents had attempted to exert their authority and hold out against his demands, but this tough little campaigner had always endured. Late one night we were riding back from a seminar when the little fellow noticed that he was on the other end of the seat from his mother—with other siblings between them. He was riding in a restraining seat and whined to sit in his mother’s lap. The father SUGGESTED that it would be best if he stayed strapped into his restraining seat. The mother began to sympathetically explain why she couldn’t hold him. Based on past experiences, he knew that this was just the opening round. Their rejection of his proposal was only tentative. He was just testing the waters to see if they would yield. If by continual insistence he should demonstrate how very important this issue was to him, they would eventually come around to seeing it his way. As he pleaded further, asking for water, I could see that the mother was feeling guilty for not being close to “HER BABY”. Didn’t his tears demonstrate how important this was to his emotional well-being? After six or eight rounds, it finally reached the brokenhearted crying stage. Mother was reaching for her baby when the father turned to me and asked, “What should I do?” Again I explained the principle: by allowing the child to dictate terms through his whining and crying, you are confirming his habit of whining and consenting to his technique of control. So I told the daddy to tell the boy that he would not be allowed to sit in his mother’s lap, and that he was to stop crying. Of course, according to former protocol, he intensified his crying to express the sincerity of his desires. The mother was ready to come up with a compromise. “He was hungry. He was sleepy. He was cold.” Actually, he was a brat, molded and confirmed by parental responses. I told the father to stop the car and without recourse give him three to five licks with a switch. After doing so the child only screamed a louder protest. This is not the time to give in. After two or three minutes driving down the road listening to his background wails, I told the father to COMMAND the child to stop crying. He only cried more loudly. At my instruction, without further rebuke, the father again stopped the car, got out, and spanked the child. Still screaming (the child, not the rest of us), we continued for two minutes until the father again commanded the child to be quiet. Again, no response, so he again stopped the car and spanked the child. This was repeated for about twenty miles down a lonesome highway at 11:00 on a winter night. When the situation began to look like a stalemate, the mother suggested that the little fellow didn’t understand. I told the father to command the boy to stop crying immediately or he would again be spanked. The boy ignored him until Father took his foot off the gas, preparatory to stopping. In the midst of his crying, he understood the issues well enough to understand that the slowing of the car was a response to his crying. The family was relieved to have him stop and the father started to resume his drive. I said “No; you told him he was to stop crying immediately or you would spank him; he waited until you began stopping. He has not obeyed; he is just beginning to show confidence in your resolve. Spank him again and tell him that you will continue to stop and continue to spank until you get instant compliance.” He did. The boy was smart. He may not have feared Mama. His respect for Daddy was growing, but that big hairy fellow in the front seat seemed to be more stubborn than he was, and with no guilt at all. This time, after the spanking, when Daddy gave his command, the boy dried it up like a paper towel. The parents had won, and the boy was the beneficiary. Now you may wonder why I did not tell the father to tell the boy that he was going to spank him until he stopped crying, and not resume driving until he had stopped. Never put yourself in the place where you may lose the contest. What if the boy didn’t stop? Would you spank him forever, or would you stop when it bordered on abuse, in which case the child would win? Your word would fall to the ground; you gave in before he did. You would have actually hardened his resolve to rebel. Furthermore, when a child is being spanked and shortly thereafter, he may be too emotionally wrought to make responsible decisions. Our concern is not just to silence the child, but to gain voluntary submission of his will through respect for our command. Father tells the boy to stop crying or he will stop the vehicle and spank. Father stops, spanks; the child cries, and the father resumes the drive. He waits three to five minutes, ignores the crying and continues to talk as if all is well. Five minutes later, the father again commands the child to stop crying. By this time there is no lingering pain and he has had time to quiet his emotions and reflect on the parental mandate: “Stop crying or get a spanking.” Again the father commands the child to stop crying or he will receive a spanking. The child continues crying only because he assumes that the status quo continues. That is, he is not at all convinced that the father means what he says. Judging from past experiences, he is sure that he will win this contest eventually. By breaking it up into several sessions, the father is reprogramming the child—Father commands with a threat; child disobeys; Father carries out threat; child loses and suffers the consequences; it is an unpleasant experience; repeat all of above five to ten times. The child concludes: There is a new order; Father is consistent; he always means what he says; I cannot win; there is no alternative to instant obedience. Get smart, be a survivor, just say no to self-will. The beauty of this kind of contest is that, when the parents conquer, it applies across the board. The child is not just yielding to the circumstances; he is yielding to his parents. The rebel in him is dying. This submission will translate into every aspect of their relationship. The child has learned that the parents have more resolve than he does. They are not liars. When they say stop or else, they mean it. There is no way to bend the parents; their word is final. The next day we were sitting in the living room when the mother gave the little fellow a command. Out of habit, he commenced his whine, which turned to a cry. Mother looked discouraged and turned to me asking, “What should I do now?” I said, “Tell him to dry it up instantly and to start smiling.” When she commanded him, he immediately stopped crying and gave a faked smile that quickly turned to a sincere one in reflection to the delight on his mother’s face. I never will forget. She started laughing with absolute abandonment. She was overjoyed. “He has never obeyed me like that,” she said. For the few days that remained, he obeyed her instantly and the household was a very peaceful place. The battle was won. Whether or not the victory continues depends on how consistent the parents are, but the hard part is over. As long as the parents don’t revert to their old responses, the child won’t revert to his. There are those of you who will think that the twenty miles of spanking was cruel. Remember, this was not a daily event; it was a war to end all wars. The spankings were not wild, violent affairs. They were not greatly painful—to the child, that is. They were done in quiet calm and dignity. It is not the severity of the spanking but the certainty of it that gives it persuasive power. Our object in spanking is not to cause the child to so fear the pain that he obeys. It is to gain the child’s attention and give him respect for the parent’s word. I know that there are abusive, angry parents out there who, through their own inconsistency, find themselves in a position where they excessively spank every day. Spanking should just be the early part of a training program. It is our consistency that trains. The rod just gives credibility to our word. If your word is not credible, no amount of the rod will ever be effective. You will become abusive. If you feel abusive, you probably are. Get counsel and advice from a close friend who has a Biblical perspective on child training. In reflecting on our one-week stay with this fine family, I am amazed at their humility and grace. Giving us full license in the home must have been like the Judgment Seat of Christ. Well, not quite, but about as close as can be experienced down here in the flesh. One word of warning: Don’t invite us to come stay with you for a week; this old man has had all the crying and whining he can stand for the rest of his life. We just sit back and watch our children train our 16 grandkids. “Honey, I’ll put some wood on the fire and you put the tea on. We’ll have another quiet evening writing.”

The post Child Training Marathon Revisited and Updated appeared first on No Greater Joy Ministries.

Too Young to Spank?

Michael Pearl — Thu, 15 Jun 2006 11:00:57 +0000

When is a child too young to spank? The answer is obviously dependent on your definition of the word “spank.” Some parents practice spanking in a manner that is inappropriate for any child at any age. They strike out in anger and seek to punish the child for the offense the bad behavior has caused them. This is unacceptable at any age, but it is especially egregious when directed at very young and immature children. Spanking at any age should only be administered by those who have a proper philosophy of spanking and are not emotionally-driven. Our booklet Biblical Chastisement thoroughly discusses the philosophy of the biblical rod, but there is an additional point that we must make regarding age-appropriate chastisement. First, let’s get our terminology about spanking correct. Terminology is particularly important, because our subconscious is highly influenced by the definitions we assign to the terms we commonly use in the training or our children. For that reason, no matter the age of the child, we do not speak of “corporal punishment,” as do some, but rather of “corporal chastisement”—a biblical term found in the New Testament in the twelfth chapter of Hebrews. Emotionally stable parents, when disciplining their children, do not view themselves as instruments of the wrath of God falling on deserving young sinners. Parents emulating the nature of God have no desire to punish (to execute retributive justice) small children. A teenager who commits a violent act may need punishing, but a small child, not yet having developed a moral perspective, cannot do anything that deserves punishment. The application of punishment assumes responsibility and accountability. Punishment is not about training or correcting behavior; it is about returning “an eye for an eye.” The concept behind the principle of punishment is, “You caused pain and suffering in others, so you will receive pain and suffering as a means of paying for your wrongdoing.” So, let’s ask the question again, “When is a child too young to spank?” If, based on your terminology, you mean “spanking to inflict punishment,” all young children are too young. Until a child is old enough to know right from wrong, good from evil, heaven from hell, obeying the law from breaking the law, he is too young to punish. Before we address the issue of age appropriateness, we must make clear the vital principle that proper biblical chastisement, at any age, is not the infliction of pain so as to create a deterrent. It is true that some ten-year-old boys may be forced to obey out of the fear of a painful spanking, but in most cases, they will be motivated more by either their passion to disobey or by a learned desire to obey. Older children (ten and older), like most adults, live more by their own values than they do the fear of police or parents; whereas, young children (under three years old) are not usually intellectually mature enough to remember and calculate the possibility of consequences for their actions. They pretty much live by whim and habit; they are not that calculated and premeditated in their thinking, which is why fear of spanking is not a very good deterrent. Furthermore, obedience rendered out of fear of spanking serves no purpose higher than preventing the child from doing the bad deed again. It does not train and it does not build character. The best child-training manual ever written says, “The rod and reproof give wisdom” (Proverbs 29:15). Reproof is delivered in words. Reproof is designed to impart wisdom and understanding. Reproof corrects the child’s perspective and gives him a reason to obey that is higher than fear. The rod alone may create fear but reproof creates wisdom. However, just as the small child is not mature enough to remember to associate disobedience with the pain of spanking, neither can he receive the words of reproof, for he does not yet possess a command of the language, nor can he effectively think in terms of philosophy or principles. In short, the small child under three years old is not fully capable of profiting from either punishment or reproof. Are we parents then left without recourse? Of course not! God has provided us with the instrument of training, with very occasional use of corporal chastisement, provided it is not related to punishment.

While we can reasonably agree that the small child is too young to be punished, and we can understand that he is too immature to profit from reproof, are we to leave the child to himself until he gets old enough to discuss his fleshly actions and riotous ways? “…a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame” (Proverbs 29:15). Too young for corporal punishment and too immature for reproof? What’s left to us is “Training.” “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it” (Proverbs 22:6). Biblical training will incorporate the principle of the rod as a reinforcement to parental commands. By the term “rod,” I mean spanking. The Bible never uses the word “spank,” but it is bold in its use of the word “rod” in regard to child training. “Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him” (Proverbs 22:15). Notice, it is a rod of correction, not a rod of punishment. The rod that corrects is the rod that trains. We have made the point here that children under three (give or take six months or so) cannot profit from corporal punishment, but we have made the point elsewhere that small children do profit from the application of the training rod. How are they different? In both cases, the child is being swatted with an instrument. There is a great deal of difference in both the severity and the number of “licks,” and also in the parents’ expectations and perspective. For that reason, we cannot arbitrarily specify a suitable age and declare that it is fitting to spank a child beginning at that point. Children differ, spankings differ, circumstances differ, and parents differ. A six-month-old boy is capable of throwing a fit, demanding to have his way, but he is not being “a bad boy.” He cannot be declared morally bad with his limited intellect and zero moral perception simply because he acts in a socially unacceptable fashion. Although he can make it uncomfortable and inconvenient for his parents he cannot be blamed; for to consider punishing a six-month-old is absurd—a total failure to grasp reality. But all of his demanding behaviors and disruptive outbursts become a heavy (sometimes embarrassing) burden for parents to bear, often leading them to ignore him, or worse yet, allow him to develop a deeply imbedded selfish attitude. It is obvious to any parent that the six-month-old can be demanding and angry. He can demand his way, even when it is not good for him, like crawling on the floor in a restaurant, or eating what he ought not. He can demand to have your glasses, which he will immediately destroy, and scream defiance if you do not comply with his lusts. These “partly wise” parents know that the little blustery ball of bouncing boy is intellectually beyond the profit that comes from punishment or precept, so they allow him to practice his intimidating tactics for the next year or two until his language skills develop and they are unavoidably convinced that he can now understand rebuke and appreciate responsibility. But by then he has perfected his pernicious ways. When parents are finally convinced that it is time to crack down and make demands, the child is able to crack back and win. By the time parents realize he can reason, he is beyond reasoning. He is a hardened, hedonistic heathen, steeped in fleshly practices and convinced that the world is centered around him. In the first three years, he has developed a worldview that puts him at the center and makes gratification the chief end of his life. By default, he has learned that people exist to please him; after all, that has been the order of things for all three years of his life.

Sometimes, parents suspect that their one-year-old knows more than is obvious. It is as if he has the devil in him. They began this journey not believing in spanking, but now they feel like striking the “little brat.” The sudden rise of their rage shocks them: “What kind of monster am I to feel like hitting my child?” They should be shocked. Such unchecked feelings can only lead to abuse. Parents with convictions and some degree of self-control find themselves jerking the screaming child up by one arm, sitting him down a little too forcefully, with their monster screaming back in anger. Their red faces and the haste and anger with which they deal with the child testify to their sense of helplessness. But they resist taking the dreadful step of spanking. When they hear about someone else “spanking” a one-year-old, they are offended, for they know that if they were brought to the place where they lost control and spanked their child, it would be a definite act of violence against the little one. They have a concept of spanking that was derived from their own frustration and anger, which in some cases is added to what they remember as a child when their father or mother had even less self-control than they do, and they ended up on the receiving end of violence in the name of spanking. Their own experiences have left them with a warped perspective. They see all spanking through the scarlet of their own colored glasses. Theirs is a common and painful experience, but there is another way. It is the way of peace. It is a path without anger or loss of control. It is the method of training, the walk of discipline. First, the parent must be trained to exercise personal discipline, and then he is capable of constraining the child to walk in discipline—sometimes by application of the rod of training. The child grows up emotionally secure, with no self-loathing, wrapped in a bright beam of love, and walking securely on the ground of self-respect. It is a journey that ends with exceptional adult children who bless their parents. “When is a child too young to spank?” Based on my definition of “spanking,” I can answer the question. A child is too young to spank when spanking is not profitable to the child. Of course, the same applies to a child of any age. Let me give you an example of the application of the “rod of training.” A six-month-old throws his food bowl on the floor because he doesn’t like what is in it. This is the early stage of self-will and defiance. If the little guy gets away with it and if his parents don’t constrain him to do otherwise, then they are normalizing such behavior. Furthermore, they are allowing the seeds of defiance to grow in the child’s soul. Rebuke here would not be effective, nor would punishment. The child would not make any connection between his action and any suffering that you inflicted. If he were spanked hard enough to create significant pain, he would become so distracted with the pain and so fearful and emotionally disturbed that he could not be trained to any end. Remember, the child is simply expressing his will by dumping the food in the floor. I have had food set before me that I felt like dumping on the floor, but it would have been socially embarrassing to take that action. The child has no social consciousness, so he does whatever he feels like. Dumping it is not a great offense for a six-month-old, but he will not always be six months old, and it won’t be cute for long. It will make you downright mad when he is three years old and flings a whole plate of food into your lap. So we watch him, knowing his propensity to selfish compulsion. When he seizes his bowl with intentions of dumping it, swat the offending hand with a little instrument (light wooden spoon, rubber spatula, flexible tubing less than a quarter inch in diameter, or any instrument that will cause an unpleasant sting without leaving any marks). As you swat the offending hand, say “No” in a normal commanding voice. The tone is more important than the word―not angry―but decisive. Children understand the temperament in your tone before they are born, and will recognize it. This swat is not punishment. Probably, it will not even cause the little guy to cry. He will be shocked and stop any action in which he is engaged. Explain to him that he is not to throw his food onto the floor. If he again makes an attempt, swat his hand again and say, no. The third time is the charm. He now knows that “No” uttered in a commanding tone, is something serious. He will not try that stunt again—at least not for this meal. Understand well, if he has already dumped his food onto the floor, it is too late to swat him. He will not make the intellectual association, and any spanking would then be “punishment” for past deeds, entirely counterproductive for a small child. If you didn’t catch him as he was attempting to spill it, then you must put the plate and food back in front of him and be ready to respond when he tries it again. This is training for the purpose of discipline. The child will actually profit emotionally from this exercise, for he is constrained to act in ways that will make him more loved and cause him to find wide approval from everyone he is around. A child with unacceptable habits becomes a rejected child, then a dejected child, and eventually a self-loathing kid who feels that he can never please anyone and that no one likes him. I am sorry the psychologists and secular child advocates don’t get it, but then if all parents practiced child training as I have suggested, there wouldn’t be any need for abnormal psychologists or child protection agencies. A lot of people would move on to more practical kinds of work, and there wouldn’t be any more crime or war. Yes, we spank our little ones, but only as we define spanking, not as others might imagine it to be. We obey God in applying the rod of training, not because we are gullible and blind religious fools, but because the Word of God has made us wise beyond our secular peers. We know what is good for our children. We know it from experience, our own and the experience of our forefathers who walked in wisdom applying the rod of correction to our backsides. Some of us don’t remember any of the much-talked-about “cruel beatings” that are attributed to our “strong disciplinarian” forefathers. We remember loving parents who cared for our souls. They applied the rod with firmness and dignity. To us, they represented the law of God, and they stood for everything that was good and wholesome. They called us to the higher path and chastened us when they felt we needed a little reminder to walk by the rule of law rather than by our passions. Today, we thank them, just as our children now thank us. Since our Heavenly Father chastens us (Hebrews 12), could we do otherwise than to emulate his child-training methods?

The post Too Young to Spank? appeared first on No Greater Joy Ministries.

The Folks in England Are Talking About Us

Debi Pearl — Sat, 15 Apr 2006 11:00:30 +0000

The good folks from The Old School House magazine planned a speaking tour to England this spring... The good folks from The Old School House magazine planned a speaking tour to England this spring. No Greater Joy signed up to have our literature distributed on their tour. We had no idea it would cause any problem. We are told that in England it is a crime to spank your children. Therefore Christians are not able to openly obey God in regard to Biblical chastisement. They are in danger of having the state steal their children. Christian parents do not want to be seen at an event that might be distributing literature advocating spanking. I remember how scared I was when we first started homeschooling. Because it was rare and unknown to the authorities, most were against it, suspecting us guilty of all manner of dark and evil deeds. It had not yet come to the public’s attention and the legislators had never heard of anything so “unorthodox.” Surely it was “depriving the children of a good education.” We received scary visits from the child protective agency, and they had us in court threatening to take our children away from us if we continued to homeschool. While we fought it legally, we were forced to make contingency plans to move to Central America, fleeing ignorance and oppression. But we joined with many others and fought it in the legislature of Tennessee. Parents prevailed and homeschooling was recognized to be our parental right. There was nothing on earth as important to us as our children. There was no fear greater than that of losing them. I can completely understand WHY the parents of England would be so concerned. Anyway, the blogs of England have been buzzing with all manner of misinformation concerning the Pearls. Of course, us two old Pearls were unaware that we had become internationally infamous. Furthermore, we have been too preoccupied to give it any thought or energy. Both sets of our aged parents have been in health crisis, plus we continue to run an ever expanding ministry (18 employees and growing) besides trying to squeeze time in with our children and grandchildren. But then we started getting letters from England, informing us that Rebekah Joy’s (our eldest daughter) blogged response to the criticism was widely and favorably received. I called Beka and told her to send us a copy. Here it is. Are Michael & Debi Pearl “Guilty as Charged?” My name is Rebekah Anast, I am the firstborn daughter of Michael and Debi Pearl, the authors of the best-selling book To Train Up a Child. A handful of angry people have begun an outcry against Michael and Debi Pearl for the child-training principles in this book. These nay-sayers have also struck out against The Old Schoolhouse Magazine for refusing to reject the teaching of “the Pearls.” Along with quoting out of context, verbalized anger, and false assumptions, they have attacked those associated with the Pearl family, and threatened to shake the fragile platform of homeschooling in the UK by going to the media with the sensational story that certain UK homeschool groups are hosting the infamous Michael and Debi Pearl. In every society there are “movers and shakers,” those people who call the media, make the stories (or the stink, as the case may be) and bring about changes that effect the thousands of ambivalent and, often clueless, masses. Some of these movers and shakers have the good of the masses in mind, others are simply angry, irrational people that need attention and like to make a scene. Unfortunately, the media thrives on these sensation-makers, and is quick to poison the waters of truth if the poison is offered on the silver platter of a “hot story.” How do we combat the irrational and unfounded sensationalism that would poison the waters of our communities? With truth. If the media wants a story, give them the truth. Let them know that we are very aware of the lies and sensation being spread - but that we’re not afraid of it, because we know the truth. These sensational storytellers say that Michael and Debi Pearl teach child abuse, the subjection of women, and general injustice. I would know (I am their daughter) whether their techniques are violent and unjust, or loving and temperate. I would know if the result is an emotionally damaged and fearful child, or a creative, successful, happy adult. I would know, yes, better than any one of these angry people, whether Michael and Debi Pearl are barbaric child abusers, or loving, successful parents. Every type of abuse leaves evidence to prove its occurrence, whether it be a mark on the spirit or the body. Let me give you the evidence that is me: I am 32 years old, married and the mother of three children. I am the happiest person I know, and my life is full of fruit; my own three very happy, balanced children are completely sound in body and mind. I have written articles, books, screenplays, and traveled the world for 4 years, meeting new people, eating new food, ministering to those in need, and loving life. I always returned to my favorite place and my favorite people... my family. I married a wonderful man who is worth every moment of reverence and honor I give him; he is my best friend and only lover. I have very few bad memories of childhood, all of which I can recall clearly; my dog dying, my hand getting cut on a fresh pine board, my brother being stung by bees, and my father’s grief over a friend’s suffering. That’s all that I can recall. I remember only one spanking. I remember it because I laughed all the way through it, and so did my Dad. I had played a prank that was dangerous, but funny, and fully deserved a spanking for it, but my parents were unable to spank me without laughing. That is the only spanking I clearly remember. The others were so well-deserved my conscience was able to write off the memory once the deed was paid for. I was never injured in body or spirit by the training I received. I was never “struck” in anger. I did receive non-injurous spankings on my fully clothed backside with a willow switch when I had clearly transgressed a known “law” of the house. These spankings did not leave bruises or abrasions, or emotional distress. I learned by the gentlest way possible that foolishness has consequences and wise choices make life comfortable. This training has literally saved my life and I am eternally grateful to both my parents for using a literal rod to train my flesh to make wise choices. My brothers and sisters were my best friends growing up. We did everything together; swimming, playing, working. We usually got in trouble together too, and when spankings were due, they were due all around. However, trouble was hard to find, as either Mom or Dad was almost always with us, joining in the fun, the projects, and the learning. From dancing in the rain, to building forts, to learning to ride a bike; they were there, so much a part of my life. A person is innocent until proven guilty. I have proof that Michael and Debi Pearl are wise and loving parents: I am the proof, and every one of my siblings would agree with me. Almost everything we (my parents) have ever written is available online for FREE on nogreaterjoy.org; and everything else is as inexpensive as possible while still allowing No Greater Joy to operate as a non-profit ministry, geared toward helping thousands of parents and children. A lot of information about the Pearl’s on the internet is simply taken out of context or completely misquoted. Look up the quotes on nogreaterjoy.org for yourself and make sure your source isn’t lying or misconstruing the truth. It’s important to the homeschool movement that we be accountable for our views, instead of blindly following the loudest sensationalist, or giving them credibility of any kind. Rebekah Joy Anast Debi Pearl

The post The Folks in England Are Talking About Us appeared first on No Greater Joy Ministries.

Our Own Set of Possessed Damsels

Debi Pearl — Tue, 15 Feb 2005 12:15:19 +0000

For the last year or so, we have had a group of about eight “damsels” working overtime trying to disrupt our ministry. When we advertise for a Seminar, they call the church where we are scheduled to be and warn them that their tax-exempt status could be in jeopardy, or that we are being watched by the authorities. One pastor, believing their lies, almost canceled a seminar 24 hours before it was to take place. We explained the situation, so he let it go on, but he stayed home so he could not be implicated. Recently, when we held a seminar in Chattanooga, Tennessee, being warned by these damsels, the Department of Human Services of Tennessee sent a “spy” to observe. We welcomed him readily. We have nothing to hide. A few weeks later, the head detective for the state of Tennessee dropped by our place to visit. We knew we did not have to talk to him, but again, having nothing to hide, Michael answered all his questions for about an hour, gave him our booklet “Biblical Chastisement,” our DVD set, The Joy of Training, and several of our books. Biblical Chastisement was written for just this purpose—a defense of Biblical child training. He talked to Deb for about an hour and also spent time with our office staff. He then called and spoke with one of our grown, married children. So the nice detective left, having come to the conclusion that the ladies who were reporting us did not KNOW us. He was satisfied that everything we do and teach is within the law. Since he left, I have honestly been expecting him to invite us to teach foster parents how to train the State’s children. We welcome cooperation with them. They need direction desperately. So, we would like to thank the “damsels” for helping to give us a clean bill of “child-training” health. We are now officially investigated and approved, however unnecessary it was. Thank you, damsels. The damsels are apparently on a campaign to load up web sites that sell our materials with bad (sometimes vulgar) reviews. Feel free to crowd out their bad reviews with your positive ones. Since there are only 8 of them, and 150,000 of you, it should be quite easy for the Saints of God to disrupt the “ministry” of these ungentle damsels. They must not have much of a love life or family life, because they spend so much time bashing us. Also, someone has (perhaps these same damsels) started messing with our website. It adds extra work for us, just trying to pull down orders and e-mails. Someone has sent messages in our name wanting credit information. We NEVER ask for credit information from you, so please, NEVER give out information thinking we have asked you for it. One man contacted us, complaining of the nasty e-mail we sent him. We did no such thing! If it was nasty, it certainly didn’t come from us! So, we really feel a kindred spirit with Paul and Silas, which is very encouraging. We ask that you do remember to pray for us and to stand in prayer against the forces of darkness that would hinder our ministry. We are just two old folks, and we need an army of young, strong families standing with us in prayer, including their active participation in combating these grievous damsels and any other tools of Satan he may use. You might be interested in reading the rest of the story in Acts. The possessed damsel was in the hire of someone, and when she lost her devils, that employer took legal action against Paul and Silas. These men of God ended up in jail. God caused an earthquake, setting them free, and when the jailer saw the power of God he and all his family were saved. As I said, pray for us. Mike likes to go to prison every week to preach, but neither of us wants to live there, although Mike would enjoy the excitement of an earthquake (not me, I’m a sissy). Debi Pearl

The post Our Own Set of Possessed Damsels appeared first on No Greater Joy Ministries.

Spanking a 7-Month-Old?

Michael Pearl — Sun, 15 Jun 2003 11:05:42 +0000

Letter:

Dear Pearls, I am a pastor’s wife and have a question for you. Is it right to spank a 7-month-old for crying when put down for bed? I grew up with just ignoring the child, thus training them that they will not get their way. My husband wants it to stop all together. I know all the verses for training a child, but I am not sure how to approach this situation. I know you will give me a straight answer. - Charity

Debi Answers:

Dear Mama, Different families feel differently about this. Most babies quickly learn to adapt. Train your baby to become familiar with a special blanket or soft toy that she gets when she goes to bed. One of our friends uses white, soft, worn-out pillow cases so that she gets a fresh clean one each day. Babies find comfort in the familiar. Also, they like to know that they are not alone or abandoned. So keep a light on, a ticking clock in the room, or their door open so they can hear noises from the other room. Daddy needs to be in charge, and you need to learn to trust and honor his judgment. If you don’t, then the children will never trust and honor you. He is the head, and you are the heart of the home. Let the head decide, and the heart makes those decisions sweeter. - Debi Pearl

Mike adds his two cents:

The above question is loaded. Since we do not know your attitudes or the details of your circumstances, it is impossible to give a yes or no answer. But I do caution: A 7-month-old is too young to be spanked as such—too young to be punished. They do not have any understanding of good and evil (Deut 1:39; Is 7:15-16; Romans 9:11) and cannot reason weighty matters. But the 7-month-old is already learning the dark art of self-will, and must be wisely, gently, and firmly constrained to yield to authority. The very nature of authority is the power to constrain to obedience through enforcing negative consequences. “A child left to himself will bring his mother to shame” (Proverbs 29:15). Leaving the child in the bed to cry herself to sleep is indeed a negative consequence, and may be used as a last resort, but it is a result of a failure to train and is not the most effective training. Obviously, we wouldn’t want to see her crying herself to sleep on a regular basis, any more than we would want to spank her every evening. Difficult measures and unpleasant con-sequences should be thoughtfully employed so as to effect a positive change very quickly—in two or three nights. If negative consequences are not soon productive, they become counterproductive. So before I would resign to allowing her to spend her evenings crying, I would try other measures first. Arrange circumstances so as to lull the child to sleep in a peaceful and natural manner. Don’t keep her up until she is exhausted. Don’t try to put her to sleep when her heart and respiration are racing from excitement. Be consistent in the details of how she is put to sleep each time. Create a thirty-minute “unwinding” ritual that ends with laying her down to sleep. Once you condition her to expect to yield to your overtures, she will lie down and sleep with only minimal suggestion, and even in more distracting circumstances. When you have taken the child through her night-time paces and left her to sleep, never, never allow her to come out of the snooze mode and become active again. To do so is to leave her with the belief that time and place of sleep is left to her discretion. Humans are made by God to operate according to stimulation. Things that activate any of the senses are stimulating and pleasurable. Children love pleasure, and they love to be stimulated. They so love excitement that they will fight going into the “shut-off” mode. Wind them down gently so sleep comes naturally. If the child has been mistrained, or if you have failed to provide a good prelude to sleep, and the child rises up to fight and resist, you should evaluate your whole procedure so as to improve your pre-sleep ritual for tomorrow night. But for the moment, you must constrain the child to obey authority and remain lying down. As a last resort, you may have to prove the power of your word by enforcing it with one or two stinging licks (applied with a small flexible switch) to the child’s leg that says to the child, “There is no reward for getting up; Mama means business; she is not going to give over to my demands; the path to greatest pleasure is to go to sleep; there is no alternative; my parents always get their way; what can I say? Good night.” Commands are not negotiable; authority must be obeyed. The soul of the child needs that kind of authority in her life to be stable emotionally and to develop a will to accept discipline. Finally, if you are angry or frustrated, do nothing more than allow the child to cry herself to sleep. You are momentarily unfit as a trainer. Get your head and heart together and do better tomorrow night. - Michael Pearl

The post Spanking a 7-Month-Old? appeared first on No Greater Joy Ministries.

The Challenge

Michael Pearl — Mon, 15 Apr 2002 11:30:24 +0000

There was a time when somewhere in every large city there was a dirty building, dimly lit, tucked back where decent folks would never go. Nearby was a liquor store and a cheap motel that rented rooms by the hour. It cost more if you wanted clean sheets. An XXX and a blinking neon sign, sporting a girlie silhouette, marked the building. Only the sleaziest characters in town would go to such a place, and then they hurried in with their collars up or their hats pulled down low. Zoning laws prevented the placement of these hellholes close to residential areas or churches. Those ordinary fathers who might have lusted to know what tantalizing secrets lay behind the black door and painted windows had more self-respect, or at the least, concern for their reputations, than to risk being seen patronizing those outposts of Sodom. The Canaanites, whom God slew down to the last woman and child, would have been destroyed sooner if they had obtained this 16-millimeter sin. Twenty years ago most of us didn't even know one person who patronized these places. It was unheard of and the buildings were seldom seen. The law and the courts treated those "Adult Book-stores" like spilt sewage. In the early nineties, most of us heard about people who owned computers in their homes. Then we heard about something called the web. What is that? Something like a spider web? Do I remember a famous line from one of the books we used to read, something about, "O the tangled web we weave…?" "They are looking at dirty pictures on their computers," someone said. "Doesn't look like they could see much on those lousy screens." "Oh, they are improving the monitors every day; they will soon be as good as the TV." "Thankfully, the computers are too expensive for most people to have one in their home, and they are too hard to operate, so the children won't be exposed to that stuff. Anyway, they will soon make it illegal." Well, here we are just one decade later, and the Supreme Court of the United States of America has protected the rights of profiteers and perverts to display images of child molestation on the web. It is illegal for public libraries to filter out pornography. While the Ten Commandments are considered offensive and are being removed from government property, taxpayers are forced to support the government supply of pornography to the masses, free of charge. Most homes now have computers with monitors that are more realistic than the TV. Children can operate them better than the adults; and over 20% of everything on the web is pornography or worse. Half of the Christian families in America now have the XXX store right in their homes. Families lie down at night and sleep just a few feet from the black door of Sodom. People who would have been outraged to have found a stack of porno magazines under a mattress now have a stack 30 miles high, right in their home. There was a time that if a man was 10 minutes late getting home from work an explanation was expected; today men retreat to rooms with closed doors and take trips to Bangkok, Thailand or the skin joints of New Orleans. Fifteen years ago less than 1% of men used pornography. Today, according to recent polls by Christian ministries, more than half of the professing Christians "use pornography" regularly. Preachers who would have been too proud to have ever gone to a porn shop, can now go to the worst joints in the world, knowing they are absolutely secure against accusing eyes. How can this ministry help parents train up their children in the way they should go when fathers are racing toward hell through fiber optic cables? There is an epidemic. The churches are either dead or alive with lust. No Greater Joy Ministries receives hundreds of letters every month. Eight years ago we never got letters that confessed that pornography was a problem. But over the last three or four years, an increasingly large percentage of our mail reveals that fathers are shutting out the family and shutting themselves in to cyberspace. Marriages are failing and fathers are molesting their daughters. Young sons are finding their way on the web and practicing on their sisters. Preachers are silent. When they do speak out against the sins of digital Sodom, you would think the sins were nothing worse than gluttony or laziness. "Christian" counselors are practicing therapy on porno addicts—helping them "work through" their "addictions." In just a few short years the church has accepted pornography and child molesting into its lists of "christian" sins. Thus the sins of Sodom have been normalized in the "christian" church. This sin is so pervasive in our society that if all the child molesters were arrested on Friday night, there wouldn't be enough people show up for work on Monday to operate the country. Prisons that now have 1,000 inmates would have 100,000. I am heartsick, head sick, and nauseated at my stomach. I am angry. If I knew which direction was out of Sodom I would turn my face and feet that direction and never look back. If God does not damn America and all the Western world in the next 10 years, he will have to resurrect the Canaanites and Sodomites and apologize to them for being so narrow-minded and bigoted. Men of God are a shrinking minority in the "christian church." It no longer means anything to be called a Christian. I feel the need to add an additional qualifier. We have a dozen computers in our home and office hooked to the web. I pay men to come in unannounced and search the web history of every computer for signs of accessing pornography. When my son-in-law comes to visit, I have him search our web history. I have no fear that anyone in my home would fall prey to the tangled web of debauchery, but I want to be certified along with the rest of my office workers. I want everyone concerned to know that my Lord is worthy of my devotion. I challenge you. Let us who name ourselves after the holy man of Galilee make a statement to the "church" and the world. Let us proclaim in no uncertain terms that we believe Jesus is worthy of our whole hearts. Let us demonstrate that there is a remnant that does indeed walk in truth. Let us get certified as real Christian men. Find three or four other Christian men who will covenant with you to certify that you are free from porn on the web. You will place your computer in such a position that everyone in the house can see the screen when it is in operation. You will never stay up late and operate the computer when no one is looking in on you. You will account for your time to your wife. When you go to town, you will never go alone. Your wife, one of the children or another man will go with you. Your computer will be open to inspection at any time by any of the men with whom you have entered covenant. You will never erase the web history on your computer unless in the presence of one of the other men. You will welcome one of your covenant brothers to walk in unannounced and search your web history periodically. You will do the same for each of them. As a group you will make it known that you have been certified, and you will challenge others to form additional groups and maintain their certification. Men who have the web and will not open themselves to inspection should be noted as not walking in truth. "Provide things honest in the sight of all men" Romans 12:17. "Abstain from all appearance of evil" 1 Thessalonians 5:22. "And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offense toward God, and toward men" Acts 24:16. "For there is no man that doeth any thing in secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly. If thou do these things, shew thyself to the world" John 7:4. "He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy" Proverbs 28:13. Michael Pearl

The post The Challenge appeared first on No Greater Joy Ministries.

A Wise, Older Couple is Troubled at What They Saw

Debi Pearl — Mon, 15 Apr 2002 11:10:14 +0000

Dear Pearls, We recently visited a family who follow your teachings to a “T.” The children are very well behaved. But I wondered if you’ve ever had anyone overdo it? The children didn’t have the spark of life as much as we remember our children having. We pass out your books and have been around other families with wonderful kids that are more relaxed and happy. We were troubled. Should we be?

Debi Pearl Responds

Yes, we all need to be troubled, and young couples need encouragement and help from the older couples. We have seen families who take what we and others have written and use it like the law. When older, wiser people try to help bring balance, the younger couples do not take their counsel. It grieves us. If children are not bubbling with joy and eager to be a part of life, then something is very wrong. Good training begins and ends with tying strings of fellowship and bonds of good times.

The Letter Continues...

We also noted that the mother was swatting their very young children for not meeting possibly unfair expectations. One as young as 13 weeks old was being swatted to stop crying. The mother was trying to teach her one year old to put toys away, but the kid just didn’t understand and it was an intense confrontation. We tried to let them see a balance but what they understood you meant and what we understood you meant were two very different things.

Debi Responds

It is true that we occasionally hear that young mothers and more seldom, fathers, take what we teach out of context and misuse their children. First, love your child. Care that the child is well, happy, and relaxed. Training should not be tense, upsetting, hurtful, or pushed. It should be a simple exercise in showing the child what you want him to do. A tiny stimulus to direct the child when they are small is enough. For example, if a 3 month-old nursing baby bites, don’t spank. She does not know she did bad. Just gently pull a hair on her head. She will startle back in momentary discomfort and immediately start nursing again. The tiny bit of discomfort makes the baby relate the biting down with the gentle pulling of the hair. You have not made her obey, you have only conditioned her to respond differently. That is training. If you take a 13 week-old baby who is fussing, and squirming and pop her leg, it will only bring more fussing and crying. The child cannot relate those 2 events. She most likely has a tummy ache that needs some relief, not added pain. Ask God for wisdom. He promises to give to those who simply ask.

The post A Wise, Older Couple is Troubled at What They Saw appeared first on No Greater Joy Ministries.

Questions Answered

Michael Pearl — Sat, 15 Apr 2000 11:10:58 +0000

Dear Michael and Debi Pearl,I am a young mom with four small children (ages 5 and under.) I am still learning so much as I have been a selfish mom and wife in the past.
I am trusting God to perfect that which He has started in my life and I know that He is able. Will you please help me with a few questions? What to do with a four-year-old and a two-year-old who continually suck their thumbs while also sticking one finger up their noses (boys! I’m afraid they’ll damage something, and I have tried so much…) Please help!

Thumb sucking and other forms of infantile stimulation are not character issues, and therefore not an object of great concern, unless such habits hang on long enough to be a social problem or unless they are used as a form of emotional retreat. When children express their moodiness or rebellion by lapsing into this or other forms of self-stimulation, it needs to be addressed. Pull his hand away and say, "Take your hand away from your mouth." The repetition of pulling the hand away and giving a simple, non-irritated response will help curb and maybe break the habit. However, anytime you see a child respond to command or rebuke (such as: eat your spinach) by retreating to thumb sucking, give a swat to the hand and follow through completely to get immediate obedience to the original command. This emotional retreat will cause more problems than buckteeth.

Please give me a description of the switch or rod of which you so often speak. I wish you could send me one so I could see it.

The rod we speak of is a plumbing supply line that can be bought at any hardware store or large department store. It is a slim, flexible, plastic tubing that supplies water to sinks, and toilets. Ask for "¼ inch supply line." They cost less than one dollar. I always give myself one swat before I swat the child to remind myself how much force to exert. It stings the skin without bruising or damaging tissue. It’s a real attention-getter. Michael demonstrates its use in our new Seminar videos.

My 8-year-old daughter tells me everything. My husband heard her telling about some things that happened at church and he said it sounded like gossip. How can I encourage her to tell it without her engaging in gossip?

Many mothers establish emotionally intense bonds with their children by encouraging "telling all." The "all" the child learns to tell is how bad everyone else's children are and how he alone choose righteousness. Tiny details, such as the other child’s expression or attitude are discussed as well as "why do you think they...?" It is amazing how fast a small child can become subtle in knowing when to leave out or add a word, a phase, an expression, an emotion, or an opinion, thus changing the whole color of what really happened. Once this habit is established it is very hard for mother to see the deception that is so apparent to others. By your eagerness to hear the tale and respond you are encouraging the child into being an "accuser of the brethren." This also causes all other siblings to avoid and dislike the "tattle tail." A house full of "tattle tails" causes extreme mistrust between them. On the other hand, you want your children to feel free to talk to you, to seek out your counsel and enjoy sharing with you. When children feel comfortable that you are just, they will seek an open relationship that is wholesome and profitable, and not one based on the faults of others. "Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things." Philippians 4:8. Encourage a good report, something that extols his brother and sister. Michael adds his two cents: The key to encouraging a wholesome attitude in your daughter lies in your response. Never develop a "them and us" attitude. Don’t lead your daughter to feel superior to others. You should be sad when you hear of the failure of others. Discuss with your daughter ways to help the bad situations. Never allow your daughter to feel a closeness to you by tattling on others. If she emotionally profits from running others down, she will keep doing it even to the point of lying. Finally, make sure that you do not talk about the faults of others. Never enjoy the tale that is told. Teach your daughter to minister to others, not to feel superior to them. You do this by example.

The post Questions Answered appeared first on No Greater Joy Ministries.

How Early Should I Start Training?

Michael Pearl — Tue, 15 Feb 2000 12:00:54 +0000

At what age should I start disciplining my children? At what age should I start homeschooling? At what age should I begin teaching my children to work? You must start training your children one year before their first birthday, because if you don’t, they will be trained without your input. A sapling grows the way you bend it. But if you don’t bend it, it will grow and take shape just the same, though not as you would have it. It will be shaped by the prevailing winds, which, you can be sure, never blow in the right direction. From day one, every conscious moment of a child’s life is training; every event, and non-event, is schooling, preparation for the rest of life. If a child’s eyes can see, tongue can taste, nose can smell, hands can feel, or ears can hear, training is in progress. Parents don’t need to initiate a program, set aside a time, or confront the child in some special way for training to occur. Training and schooling never cease, never rest. A child develops with or without you. If you are not deliberately leaving your imprint on every stage of his development, know that someone is. A child left to himself in a crib or a room is being trained. All child-initiated events that have consequences, be they pleasant or unpleasant, are training. If a child stumbles into an experience and finds the consequences pleasurable, he is trained to repeat it. If the consequences are unpleasant, then he seeks to avoid it. If an infant sticks his finger in his eye, the pain will discourage him from repeating that on himself, but he may try it on you. That is unless you should make his unwelcomed advances unpleasant for him. The first time an infant pulls your hair, if you pull his, he will never be a hair-puller. One taste of a plastic toy communicates that it is not made to eat. These experiences are physical, and are easy to understand, but what about soul training? If a child is playing alone and becomes frustrated with a toy, expressing anger, his reaction, left unchecked, is training him to deal with his environment in anger. If a child cries out in loneliness and is rewarded by being picked up, you have trained him to repeat the crying any time he wants to control the adults in his life. When a child is told no, and he responds with temper, if the parents compromise and give over just one-inch to the child’s demands, they have trained him to throw fits. It will become a life-long habit, begun at three months. What you don’t do as a parent is as influential as what you do. If you permit a child to indulge in a pleasurable act several times, with no negative consequences, then he will develop a preference and a habit. If you give the kid an old set of car keys to play with, you have trained him to abscond with your keys. If you allow a child to snatch food from your hand, you have trained him to have crude table manners. If you allow him to get up after you have put him down to sleep, you have trained him to ignore your commands and to make his own decisions about his sleeping habits. You say, "But I didn’t mean to be training." Who trained the cat not to take food away from the dog? OK, so your cat does take food away from your dog. Then I ask you, who trained the cat that he could get away with taking food away from the dog? Answer: The dog trained the cat by his responses, or lack of responses. All parental responses are training. All parental "do nothings" and "Oh, isn’t he cute," and "He is a real bear-cat," and "He is such a strong-willed child," are training par excellence. I saw a mother enjoying her six month old, sitting in front of him singing, "No, No, No, No, No, No, No, and waving her index finger back an forth to the beat of the music. It sounded like a cat food commercial. This started out as a command to stop doing something, but it degenerated into a sing-song, redefining of the meaning of "No." I wanted to ask her, "What do you say when you really mean ‘No’?" She was training the child to understand that "No" meant, "Let’s have some fun." So, it is not a question of whether or not a child is being trained, or at what age. It is a question of who is doing the training and to what end? Anyone and everyone is a trainer, including other kids. The prevailing winds blow upon your child’s flesh and train him in degeneracy. You must interrupt that natural flow, bending the child’s soul against the force of the world, the flesh, the devil, Hollywood, relatives, baby sitters, peers, nursery workers, and books on psychology, that is, if he is to stand different from the other trees in the forest. The first six months of a child’s life is much more formative than most parents realize. The first three years molds personality and sees the establishment of the child’s world-view. Children can be trained after three years, but much of the training amounts to enabling the child to function in spite of bad habits instilled in those early months and years. Training socially If your child is not liked by others, or if he is often in conflict, he is socially impaired. A shy child is socially inadequate, as is one who is loud and demands center stage. A bully on one side and a whining tattletale on the other are social misfits. A child quickly develops a social perspective, with or without parental guidance. Investigation teaches the infant what is acceptable in his society. Children are always influenced by the temperament of their parents. If parents are overprotective, oversensitive, insensitive, angry, selfish, hostile or otherwise, the children tend to view the world through the social order parents maintain in the home. I have had adoptive parents come to me describing the "generational sins" of their adopted children. Knowing the parents, I usually find it amazing that the adoptive parents seem to have the same lineage. Maybe it is just fate that brought them together; they were from the same family after all. Many biological parents would like to use the excuse of generational sins. It would relieve them of responsibility. A child learns the rules by stumbling around, bumping into the rights of others, as when the infant tries to put his fingers in someone’s eye or mouth, or when the two-year-old tries to take something that belongs to a four-year-old. Social rules are built on selfishness—live and let live, give and take. It is a pecking order—where people get pecked if they step out of line. It does serve to keep "everyone in his place," with the "fittest" at the top of the food chain, but it is no higher morally than a society of gorillas. If left to happenstance, a child will allow his values to be set by the worst elements in society. The concern of parents should be the knowledge that if they do not take an early and effective role in communicating social behavior to their children, the kids are going to receive their education from the world at large. But most parents, certainly our readers, are not content to allow their children to derive their social etiquette by default. The norm is too low. Parents who take a continuous and active role can ease a developing child into a godly social order by example and instruction, saving the child a lot of embarrassment and antisocial behavior. We adults are kept in line socially by pride, fear of ridicule, fear of rejection and embarrassment. But the small child is kept in line only by someone creating boundaries and then forcing compliance. Training Morally Children are born into this world without moral convictions. The two-year-old does not need bad influences to be a selfish, fleshly, carnal, hedonistic, hippie. I say that with the utmost love for all two-year-olds. Parents are failing to communicate moral convictions to their children. One reason they fail is that they start too late. Parents do not start trying to train their children until they are convinced they can receive instruction, by which time children are already confirmed in carnality, addicted to the pleasures of hedonism. I am talking about children two and three years old. Parents find it difficult to believe that their very young children are capable of early training. They wait so long that they are fighting momentum, and everything within and without the child is on the side of carnality. Your early training alone stands between your child and degrading behavior. You want to know how to train a six-month-old? By context. All with whom the child associates is the context in which the child first emulates moral attitude. Morality is first an attitude, a way of viewing the self in relationship to the stimuli that assail us. Morality is the right choice in the face of choices that are immediately more fun. Morality is choosing principle and duty above thrill and laziness. Morality is love of truth; it is a pure heart; it is love, grace, mercy, patience, kindness, hard work, wisdom, faith, joy, thankfulness, and serving others. Morality is not the lack of certain acts of debauchery. It is the heart of God practiced in these bodies of flesh. In the early months and years of a child’s life, you will not be able to lecture him on morals, but you can plant his little developing soul in pure soil. Children are rooted in the souls of those with whom they associate—including any media. You, as a parent, cannot change the environment at large. Eventually your child is going to have to enter the ugly arena of society. But in his developing years, you can tuck his little soul into yours and give him a little bit of heaven before he finds out that he is in a moral battleground where the bad guys almost always win. Training to Work Work is one thing in life that if you could get along without it, you would. All work is pain. You have to be raised with it to be hardened to it and to accept it as necessary. Every fresh budding of understanding and every newly acquired ability in the infant and small child must be immediately channeled into wholesome productivity. A child should never be allowed to acquire an attribute of mind or body that is left to idle indulgence. If a ten-month-old child, capable of picking up his own socks, sits and watches his mother pick them up, he is being mistrained—trained to be lazy. You are missing the best opportunity to teach a teenager to be a worker. Teenagers learn to work before they are two years old. I know that a child under one year old is not capable of doing one stitch of productive work. But the question before us is not how old a child should be when his work is of value. The question is "At what age should I teach my children to work?" The answer is: As they become capable of the least participation, no matter how worthless, they should be involved in working. They will have more fun than a birthday party if you involve them in all your chores. Children love cooking, cleaning and all chores that Mama and Daddy do if they occur as a matter of routine and are done in a joyful atmosphere. If this is handled properly, there will never come a time when your child is shocked that you asked him to work. He will never balk or complain. He cannot remember a time when he was not under obligation to pull his share of the load. His first awakening to life was one of being part of a team working. He happily stands up to his chores. It is what life is all about. If you wait until a child is four years old to ask him to work, he will be hurt and offended that he, the royal consumer of goods and services, should be called upon to stoop to menial chores. What a drag! What pain! What misery! Life is not supposed to be like this. He has lived four wonderful years with several servants, and now you expect him to do boring physical labor? He may do it if you force him to, but he will never like it, not now and not ever. Should you wait until they are big enough to be profitable in labor before you require it of them? Only if you want to feel like the worst villain in the world and spend most of your emotional energy nagging them into what will always be a job half done. Children should learn to work at the same time that they learn to play. A child should never be allowed to think that the world is ordered so that he plays while others serve him. Don’t pick up after the child. If a kid is big enough to pull toys out of a box he is big enough to put them back. Make work part of the play. Sit on the floor. Enjoy showing him how to put the toys away. As you give the command, "Put your toys back in the box," place a toy in the box. Give the command again and guide the child’s hand to put a toy back in the box. Put another toy in the box yourself, and then again voice the command as you guide his hand to put away another toy. If the child is never allowed to walk away from scattered toys, he will always pause to put them away, and you will never have a hassle over clean up. Three times is enough to train a child, if it is the first three experiences with the toy box. It will take more if you have mistrained him. When you must carry groceries into the house, give your toddler a light box to carry and brag about what a good worker he is. When you are carrying in firewood, give the stumbling toddler a small piece to carry. When he spills something, guide him in cleaning it up. You may have to buy a special mop and shorten the handle to keep him from jousting everything in the house. But a one-year-old that mops is a six-year-old that mops and a sixteen-year-old that is a blessing. When you have cut the grass, give the toddler a sack and a small rake and show him how to fill the sack with grass clippings. If he grows bored, don’t make demands; revive his interest; make it fun. Do you know what sick is? It is a father at home on Saturday, working in the yard while the kids sit in front of the TV and eat snacks. Don’t ask me how to get them to work. You cannot train them one way and then expect different results. Do not make your kids work alone until they get old enough to deal with the isolation. Even then, you should seek opportunities to work together. If work involves warm fellowship, it takes the pain out of it. If you have developed an adversarial relationship around work, you are causing ongoing harm. If you press a child and are never pleased, he will hate you. Work is pain, and so you labor to get the job done so you don’t have any more pain. If there is no end to the work, no reward, children will always drag because doing the job never brings relief. Give them a job that has defined limits and the reward of freedom upon successful completion. Do not allow them to have the freedom until the job is completed satisfactorily. Parents have told me that when they started making the child’s leisure dependent upon completing the job, the kids turned what was previously a four hour job into a thirty minute job, and they had fun doing it, because they were laboring so they could rest. If your child is lazy and never does an acceptable job, then you must give him a job with well defined, and easily defined, limits and stay with him until he completes the job successfully, whereupon you praise him for a job well done. If the job is cleaning his room, first carefully define what you expect, in every detail. Write it down if the kid is old enough to read. Do not nag or whine. Quietly but firmly stand by your commitment that he will not leave his room and return to his leisure until the room is perfectly ordered. He will drag at first, hoping to conquer your will, but once he is convinced that your word is final, he will comply out of pure laziness. How else can he rest? You must maintain a pleasant attitude at all times, or all is lost. Training in Academics The biggest mistake is thinking of schooling as something different from family, from everyday life. Don’t think of it as an event that starts and stops by a clock. When done most efficiently, there is no age at which you start. Nothing ever changes. Schooling is life. I know kids locally who do not "do school," and yet are far advanced over their grade level. The purest form of homeschooling is a way of life. A young mother says to her crawler, "Give me the blue sock. No, not the green one, the blue one. Here, this is the blue sock, just like mama’s dress. See, this toy is blue also. Thank you, you are a smart girl." Another mother says to a two-year-old, "Here are three raisins. See, count them. One, two, three!!!" A mother says to a three-year-old, "How many raisins do you have? That’s right, five. Now give me one. Now how many do you have? Four!! Five take away one is four!!" Entertain the children with colors, pencils, and paper in mounds. Go to your local printers and tell them you need paper for your students. They will give you scrap paper by the truckloads. You can get good quality paper forty inches wide. Kids love it. Write their names at the top and let them try writing. Hang their work on the wall. Show it off. Read to your kids and have them pronounce words. Show the three-year-olds the word "cat" and let them put a yellow line under it every time it appears in the little book. Make flash cards—don’t buy them. The kids need to see you make stuff just for them. Do not sit the kid down at a school desk and pound flash cards until he goes to sleep. As you pass through the house, pick up one card and flash it, saying the word. You don’t need to ask questions. They are learning. Write the name of foods on cards and have them point to the word that represents the food they want. Write "nap" on a card and show it to them when it is time to sleep. Read road signs. Write letters to friends. Leave notes hidden in the house for them to find and read, notes that promise a treat. Read the breakfast material—boxes of cereal. Talk about the human body, naming the body parts, the bones, muscle, organs. You don’t know those things? Get a chart; hang it on the wall and learn with your children. Look at pictures. Discuss topics at the dinner table. Talk about history and science. Investigate your yard and then go to the library and investigate books on plants, insects, the universe, animals, earthquakes, anything that is fun and interesting. That is homeschooling. The kids never know they are in school, and you never feel like a teacher. It is not important that the kids know details on any subject; or if they know details, it is not important that their knowledge be thorough. It is far more important that they develop a learning attitude than it is that they learn certain prescribed curriculum. Think of it this way; your job as teacher is not to prepare them to take a test and answer questions. Your job is to instill a love of learning, to enjoy investigation, to be inquisitive, and to know that they can learn anything they need to know if they set their mind to it. The worst thing you can do is to pound enough facts in them to pass a test, but leave them with a fear of learning, leave them feeling inadequate. Homeschooling cannot be an event out of the day; it must be the day, the night, the lifestyle of homeschooling parents. Most importantly of all, it must always be fun. If it is not fun for you, it will not be fun for them. Never-never-never approach homeschooling with apprehension or impatience. Do not let the system or in-laws cause you to fear and start pressuring the kids to perform. The day that happens you have failed, and they will fail.

The post How Early Should I Start Training? appeared first on No Greater Joy Ministries.